Spotted this opinion piece (by an ex-Mormon) on Ordain Women calling for mass resignation in response to Kelly's excommunication:

http://www.dailydot.com/opinion/women-change-mormon-church-leaving/

I agree with this topic heading and would add "men" to the assertion.

Mass resignations, or resignations of high profile people like Steve Young, Aretha Franklin, a Romney or Huntsman son or daughter, would cause change.

Whether it is ordaining women or changing the marriage waiting period, "revelation" would come real damn quick if high profile members stood up for the rank and file members.

A high-profile exit right about now would be really nice.

Aretha Franklin? Pretty sure she's not a mormon.

I'm sure he means famous Mormon Diana Ross.

Probably means Gladys Knight

I can't make any other comment here other than to say yes, I meant Gladys Knight.

Gladys Knight was made Mormon but not the Pips. They were already in, and they went back to fixing flat tires and giving directions to lost tourists. On a midnight train, woo woo.

Don't forget Geico commercials! At least they're not doing Tyler Perry crap like Gladys.

But they won't. More LDS women oppose what Kate is doing than the men.

See page 54 of this study.
http://www.pewforum.org/files/2012/01/Mormons-in-America.pdf

Kate is fighting against the women. The majority of LDS women don't want the priesthood. There will be no mass resignation.

michaelm (not logged in) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But they won't. More LDS women oppose what Kate is
> doing than the men.
[.........]
> Kate is fighting against the women. The majority
> of LDS women don't want the priesthood. There will
> be no mass resignation.

Positive societal or social change (let's take the American Revolution here, since it is a very handy and easily understood example for many reading this--including our northern cousins!!! ;) ), is not---usually for a long period of change-in-process---a matter of a mathematical majority. Logically (and in every instance I can think of right now), it could NOT be a matter of a mathematical majority, since in human societies, you can't go from a "zero point" to a "mathematical majority" point in a nano-second, or overnight, or (in much of human history) even in a generation.

Social and societal change among human beings is a PROCESS...and it often starts with either ONE person, or a VERY small group of people...and then they discuss with/persuade others, who then discuss with/persuade yet OTHERS, and---at some "moment" in this process---a "tipping point" is reached...at which time the snowball effect usually takes over. (The tipping point may not be known or understood when it happens...often it is only in retrospect that it can be identified, but at that time, it CAN, at least MOST of the time, be clearly seen as being "a" [moment] during the unfolding of the change process.)

But for usually a longish period of time, there is a MINORITY that is working for change...building consensus...building numbers of supporters...building momentum.

I'm not sure that most people here know why Hebrew is the language of modern day Israel (or why so many people, including me, can more-or-less carry on a conversation, or buy something in a grocery store, or understand a non-subtitled film, in Hebrew)...but I think the story is very instructive in relation to the Ordain Women movement.

For about two thousand years, Hebrew was an "ancient" and "DEAD" language only: the province of scholars of all Western religions, plus very learned Jews (who could read it fluently, but did not speak it except in prayers or other set formats), and those men (ALWAYS males!!!) being trained to be Christian clergy, or ancient historians.

But ONE PERSON, a man named Eliezer Ben-Yehuda (1858-1922) decided that Hebrew should no longer be a "dead" language, but should be the daily language of the Jewish people (at minimum). He literally set out to bring a dead language (something like ancient Egyptian) back to life, and to the souk ("marketplace"--the place where you buy your tomatoes and cucumbers for your daily meals). It was an utterly nutty idea: who would EVER want to learn a dead language just to use it to buy soap and diapers??? But this was Ben-Yehuda's dream: that everyone (specifically including prostitutes and their customers, etc.) would be able to converse easily in Hebrew.

When his children were born, although Ben-Yehuda and his wife were Europeans, living in Europe at that time, the rule that he and his wife (his first student) instituted was: Hebrew was the ONLY language of daily life. It became the first language of all of his children.

He, and his immediate family, were the genesis of all of the "daily" Hebrew that is spoken throughout the world today.

It starts with ONE person...

...or TWO...

...or a dozen people, or two dozen people...

...or Ordain Women, as it exists today (June 25, 2014).

The American Revolution was the same: One person, or a small handful of people, who somehow had developed a vision of their OWN country, independent, cut free of the chains tethering them to the British monarch sitting on his throne in London, England.

Take any significant movement involving human change, and it is likely to be the "same" story...the SAME story as we are observing, and participating in, TODAY re: Ordain Women.

Doesn't matter what the numbers are now, the major EFFECT of the numbers in play AT THIS MOMENT is a fact.

More women will join...even MORE will be persuaded (even if they keep their thoughts to themselves).

Exmos should know better than anyone else just how often people who HAVE changed their minds keep very (or totally!) quiet about it until---one way or another--it perhaps becomes safe enough for them, as individuals, to "come out."

The majority of Jews in the 1800s definitely did NOT have the slightest intention of making the dead and ancient language of Hebrew a language of daily life.

The majority of colonists in the various English-ruled colonies did not have the SLIGHTEST intention of becoming "Americans" in a separate, independent, nation.

And I will accept the assertion that, as I write these words, the "majority" of LDS women "don't want the priesthood."

Doesn't matter.

It is HAPPENING.

It is likely that, fifty years from now (in 2064), people will look back to where we are today and see so clearly that it was NOW, June 2014, when the tipping point occurred.

History is ALWAYS best revealed in hindsight.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 06/25/2014 04:34PM by tevai.

Thank you, PaintingintheWIN...

Today was a day overstuffed with things that had to be done, and it was GREAT to discover your kind words!

I very much appreciate them. :)

op was talking about the women of OW resigning in response.

Just because a "majority" of women do not want the priesthood does not mean there will not be mass resignations.

A majority means 50% plus 1. Even if 60% do not want the Priesthood, that means 40% do. If there are 4 million active LDS women, then 1.6 million want the Priesthood. If only 10% of them resign, a mere 4% of LDS women, that would be 160,000 resignations. If that is not a mass resignation, I don't know what is.

I'm not saying it will happen, but just because the majority opposes does not mean that a large number is not in favor. Even 40% is a big number.

On page 54, 90% of the women say that women should not be ordained.
http://www.pewforum.org/files/2012/01/Mormons-in-America.pdf

Kate has a tough job, trying to sell equality to a population of women where 90% don't want it. The church knows that and predicted minimal risk in silencing her.

OW has a tough sell: the church is wrong on the Priesthood, but right on everything else.

"The majority of LDS women don't want the priesthood."

True. But don't forget, the majority of LDS women didn't even want to be LDS and they left the church.

I have to keep reminding people, after they get signed up, more people end up leaving than staying.

The real impact would happen if men mass resigned in outrage over the treatment of their wives and daughters. It would reduce the priesthood numbers and send a strong message to the women that the priesthood holders in congregations no longer tolerate abusive behaviors toward their loved ones. But that isn't going to happen either and the church knows that.

Personally, I'm with Thingsithink. Sometimes I wonder if TSCC secretly likes all this publicity about small things, because it distracts every one from the big picture.

The point is that men and women are leaving in droves.

The issue is that members are discovering they are being duped by a lying cult. They are more angry about losing their money, and the splitting of families, being locked out of family weddings, and sacrificing two productive years and many more hours-upon-hours of slave labor. It is "sleight of hand." Look over here at this one woman and her tiny group of OW protestors! Meanwhile, the exodus continues, without anyone knowing how many they are or who they are, and that often they are whole families resigning together. This is what is REALLY happening. I love what Tevi wrote. My exit included my children, and compared to them, I don't care excatly who it is that's leaving, as long as they keep on leaving.

No one wants the Mormon priesthood, anyway, but the Mormons think if they continue to make a big deal about it, it will seem more desirable to present priesthood holders. Mormons love to feel smug about something, even it it's made-up nonsense. Hence, bad publicity becomes useful publicity. Mormons love to Keep their cult in the headlines, to make people believe it is huge and important.

I wonder what percentage of the core members want to make significant changes to the church.

Clearly there is a significant portion of members, many of whom are on the way out to begin with, who would changes things, minor and major, about the church.

I suspect, however, among those who write tithing checks and sit through the meetings, a majority would not make drastic changes.

I am all for anyone who is unhappy in any group being able to exit and move on. They should be able to join a group they are happy with or to join no group at all.

On the other hand, those who are happy and satisfied should be able to maintain the group as it is.

I keep hearing from TBMs about how much they sacrifice to "stay true". That tells me they are not having fun.

How many TBMs would not high five each other if the LDS Church:

1) Reduced tithing
2) Got rid of early morning seminary
3) Shortened or de-emphasized missions
4) Ended home teaching
5) Went to 2-hour Sunday meetings
6) Cancelled FHE
7) Allowed swim parties on Sunday
8) Started serving coffee and donuts after church
9) Said that temple attendance was only necessary annually
10) Got rid of 90% of the meetings they had to attend

Most of them are worn out and resentful. They go because they feel God wants them to. If the LDS leadership eased up on the yoke, many of them would rub their necks gratefully.

11.Lifted ban on R rated movies and porn.

My absolute favorite quote from this article:

"You can’t revitalize a rotten apple and Mormonism is rotten to its core."

a piece of poop in chocolate but it is still a PIECE OF POOP.

I did my part, I left.

Who here is going to argue that Kate Kelly would have damaged the cult more than she has, if she quietly resigned 5 years ago?

It's absurd.

I like Kate. I hope she builds her life now without beliefs in Mormonism.

Agree but ALSO by staying. Trying to require other people to live their life by your "one true way" is frankly...really mormon thinking.

Face it, LDS, Inc. is a business and it is floundering. The members are its customers and non-members are potential customers. If the customers decide they have enough, they will walk out the door and not come back. There goes the church's revenue: volunteer labor and tithing.

If customers keep coming back while dissatisfied, why should a business spend the time and money to improve its services? You know the folks at HQ are scratching their heads on how to stop the bleeding. I guess they think silencing the critics is the first step.

YES. Resign. Staying in is the ultimate validation, no matter how much you fuss.

I like the idea of a large, perhaps majority, of women who just happen to miss going to their meetings on one Sunday. Maybe they all call in sick. If there are enough of them it would be obvious that a message is being sent. I don't think LDS Inc could function without the women doing all the work. Just need to find a way to motivate women to send a message that they want to be treated equally with the men. Seems like an easy sell but the women don't seem to be ready to get serious about it.

I haven't officially resigned, but I haven't bothered to go for over a decade, and I've never felt better.

I think it can take some time to effect change. Just like durin the Civil Rights movement, you can change laws, but not always change minds. As in bigoted, misogynistic, authoritarian, homophobic, etc.

Still, who would have thought, back in the 50's and 60's we'd have an African-American president.

Whether you like him or not, the point is, change, BIG change is possible.

The bad publicity generated by the actions of the church has perhaps done more to expose it for what it really is than if it quietly capitulated. I'm not saying I don't think women deserve the priesthood, or anything else that any one, regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, etc. is entitled. All humans should be afforded the same human rights.

But sometimes, even if a cause doesn't come to fruition, the fallout can accomplish the original objective, or start the ball rolling on necessary scrutiny. As they say, the truth should be able to withstand scrutiny. The LDS has shown, through their oppressive actions, that it doesn't.

Just my opinion. Other's mileage may vary. It's all up to you to decide your point of view.

I had a young (twenty something) TBM Facebook friend come out today and announce that she is a Mormon feminist and disagrees with the exing. She had thirty "likes". That's good.

" "revelation" would come real damn quick if high profile members" - You mean God favors high ranking members? Oh No! I'm just shocked....sarcasm city.

Our Relief Society had a slogan, "If you save a mother, you save a family."

Women, even just one, have more power than they realize.

For an interesting experience check out the suffrage ads. The church doesn't have one original argument. The anti suffrage movement was running ads saying that 90% of women didn't want the vote.

However, one argument for women getting the ballot was that women bring all voters into the world. Change voters to Mormons and it's equally true and in light of the disastrous missionary program has got to scare the church considerably.